West Ranch Won Aff
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | 1 | All | All |
|
| ||
| Loyola | 2 | Quarry Lane SK | Amanda Drummond |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 3 | Immaculate Heart LM | John Overing |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 5 | Marlborough GK | Tim McHugh |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 5 | Marlborough GK | Tim McHugh |
|
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Loyola | 2 | Opponent: Quarry Lane SK | Judge: Amanda Drummond 1AC Natives AC |
| Loyola | 3 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart LM | Judge: John Overing 1AC Natives AC |
| Loyola | 5 | Opponent: Marlborough GK | Judge: Tim McHugh 1AC Natives AC |
| Loyola | 5 | Opponent: Marlborough GK | Judge: Tim McHugh 1AC Natives AC |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
0-Contact InfoTournament: All | Round: 1 | Opponent: All | Judge: All | 9/10/16 |
SEPTOCT - Loyola R2 ACTournament: Loyola | Round: 2 | Opponent: Quarry Lane SK | Judge: Amanda Drummond 1AC – SVPart 1: FrameworkThe Role of the Judge is to be a critical educator and policymaker focusing on the liberation of the oppressedGiroux 06 ~Henry Giroux, American scholar and cultural critic, "America on the Edge: Henry Giro ux on Politics, Culture, and Education," Springer, March 31, 2006~ JW The Role of the Ballot is to endorse the best policy to liberate oppressed groupsDebate should deal with questions of real-world consequences—ideal theories ignore the concrete nature of the world and legitimize oppression
Structural violence outweighs. We must listen to the voices of the oppressed.Winter and Leighton 99 (Deborah DuNann Winter and Dana C. Leighton. Winter: Psychologist that specializes in Social Psych, Counseling Psych, Historical and Contemporary Issues, Peace Psychology. Leighton: PhD graduate student in the Psychology Department at the University of Arkansas. Knowledgable in the fields of social psychology, peace psychology, and ustice and intergroup responses to transgressions of justice) (Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology in the 21st century. Pg 4-5, 1999) Finally, to recognize the operation of structural violence forces us to ask questions about how and why we tolerate it, questions which often have painful answers for the privileged elite who unconsciously support it. A final question of this section is how and why we allow ourselves to be so oblivious to structural violence. Susan Opotow offers an intriguing set of answers, in her article Social Injustice. She argues that our normal perceptual/cognitive processes divide people into in-groups and out-groups. Those outside our group lie outside our scope of justice. Injustice that would be instantaneously confronted if it occurred to someone we love or know is barely noticed if it occurs to strangers or those who are invisible or irrelevant. We do not seem to be able to open our minds and our hearts to everyone, so we draw conceptual lines between those who are in and out of our moral circle. Those who fall outside are morally excluded, and become either invisible, or demeaned in some way so that we do not have to acknowledge the injustice they suffer. Moral exclusion is a human failing, but Opotow argues convincingly that it is an outcome of everyday social cognition. To reduce its nefarious effects, we must be vigilant in noticing and listening to oppressed, invisible, outsiders. Inclusionary thinking can be fostered by relationships, communication, and appreciation of diversity. Like Opotow, all the authors in this section point out that structural violence is not inevitable if we become aware of its operation, and build systematic ways to mitigate its effects. Learning about structural violence may be discouraging, overwhelming, or maddening, but these papers encourage us to step beyond guilt and anger, and begin to think about how to reduce structural violence. All the authors in this section note that the same structures (such as global communication and normal social cognition) which feed structural violence, can also be used to empower citizens to reduce it. ====The nuclearization of society enforces an epistemologically bankrupt mode of thinking in place of traditional ways of indigenous people. ==== Part 2: CriticismSubpoint A) Environmental racismEvery aspect of nuclear production overlaps and impedes upon Native AmericansMatsunaga 14 ~Kyoko Matsunaga, Associate Professor, Kobe City University of Foreign Studies, "Leslie Marmon Silko and Nuclear Dissent in the American Southwest," The Japanese Journal of American Studies, No. 25, 2014~ JW And to add insult to injury, Native Americans don't receive proper compensation for damagesKyne and Bolin 7/12 ~Dean Kyne, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Bob Bolin, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, "Emerging Environmental Justice Issues in Nuclear Power and Radioactive Contamination," International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, July 12, 2016~ JW Subpoint B) Cultural GenocideThe health and ecological effects on indigenous populations is tantamount to cultural genocideRyser et al 3/27 1 ~Rudolph C. Ryser, Chairperson of the Center for World Indigenous Studies (CWIS), a research, education and public policy institution and he is a Fulbright Research Scholar, "The Indigenous World Under a Nuclear Cloud," Truth-Out, March 27, 2016, http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35381-the-indigenous-world-under-a-nuclear-cloud~~ JW Subpoint C) Nuclear colonial discourseDiscourse about native lands as wastelands permits nuclear colonialismEndres 09 1 ~Danielle Endres, Associate Professor of communications @ University of Utah, "From wasteland to waste site: the role of discourse in nuclear power's environmental injustices," Local Environment Vol. 14, No. 10, November 2009, 917–937~ JW The 1AC is a direct challenge to this colonial discourse. We recognize that these lands have spiritual and cultural value to indigenous populations. Our affirmation of the resolution is our method to rectify this historic abuse and challenge traditional discourse that justifies cultural destruction.Plan text: Native American tribal governments in conjunction with the USFG will ban the production of nuclear power near Native American lands.Part 3: Solvency1. Conjunction with the federal government is key. There are nuclear activities near indigenous lands that negatively affect tribes but fall outside their jurisdictionTsosie 15 2 ~Rebecca Tsosie, Regent's Professor of Law, Arizona State University, "Indigenous Peoples and the Ethics of Remediation: Redressing the Legacy of Radioactive Contamination for Native Peoples and Native Lands," Santa Clara Journal of International Law Vol 13 Issue 1, April 2, 2015~ JW 2. Any amount of radiation is dangerous. Means a ban of all nuclear power is the only way to solve.Ryser et al 2 ~Rudolph C. Ryser, Chairperson of the Center for World Indigenous Studies (CWIS), a research, education and public policy institution and he is a Fulbright Research Scholar, "The Indigenous World Under a Nuclear Cloud," Truth-Out, March 27, 2016, http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35381-the-indigenous-world-under-a-nuclear-cloud~~ JW 3. Exercising Native American sovereign power is uniquely key to addressing the historical legacy of nuclear colonialismTsosie 3 ~Rebecca Tsosie, Regent's Professor of Law, Arizona State University, "Indigenous Peoples and the Ethics of Remediation: Redressing the Legacy of Radioactive Contamination for Native Peoples and Native Lands," Santa Clara Journal of International Law Vol 13 Issue 1, April 2, 2015~ JW 4. The aff is part of a larger resistance to nuclear colonialism.Endres 3 ~Danielle Endres, Associate Professor of communications @ University of Utah, "The Rhetoric of Nuclear Colonialism: Rhetorical Exclusion of American Indian Arguments in the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Siting Decision," Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies,6:1,39 — 60, 2009~ Part 4: Underview1. Aff gets RVI's on theorya) It's key to reciprocity since neg will kick theory if I answer it 2. If they win offense under a T interp, you should re-evaluate the 1AC as a whole res aff:a) allows us to return to substance and prevents the round from devolving to theory 3. Abstract critique is useless unless it offers a concrete policy alternative that can solve for the harmsBryant 12 bracketed for grammar | 9/10/16 |
SEPTOCT - Loyola R3 ACTournament: Loyola | Round: 3 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart LM | Judge: John Overing 1AC – SVAll brackets for offensive language Part 1: FrameworkThe Role of the Judge is to be a critical educator focusing on the liberation of the oppressedGiroux 06 ~Henry Giroux, American scholar and cultural critic, "America on the Edge: Henry Giro ux on Politics, Culture, and Education," Springer, March 31, 2006~ JW The Role of the Ballot is to endorse the best methodology to liberate oppressed groupsDebate should deal with questions of real-world consequences—ideal theories ignore the concrete nature of the world and legitimize oppression
Structural violence outweighs. We must listen to the voices of the oppressed.Winter and Leighton 99 (Deborah DuNann Winter and Dana C. Leighton. Winter: Psychologist that specializes in Social Psych, Counseling Psych, Historical and Contemporary Issues, Peace Psychology. Leighton: PhD graduate student in the Psychology Department at the University of Arkansas. Knowledgable in the fields of social psychology, peace psychology, and ustice and intergroup responses to transgressions of justice) (Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology in the 21st century. Pg 4-5, 1999) Finally, to recognize the operation of structural violence forces us to ask questions about how and why we tolerate it, questions which often have painful answers for the privileged elite who unconsciously support it. A final question of this section is how and why we allow ourselves to be so oblivious to structural violence. Susan Opotow offers an intriguing set of answers, in her article Social Injustice. She argues that our normal perceptual/cognitive processes divide people into in-groups and out-groups. Those outside our group lie outside our scope of justice. Injustice that would be instantaneously confronted if it occurred to someone we love or know is barely noticed if it occurs to strangers or those who are invisible or irrelevant. We do not seem to be able to open our minds and our hearts to everyone, so we draw conceptual lines between those who are in and out of our moral circle. Those who fall outside are morally excluded, and become either invisible, or demeaned in some way so that we do not have to acknowledge the injustice they suffer. Moral exclusion is a human failing, but Opotow argues convincingly that it is an outcome of everyday social cognition. To reduce its nefarious effects, we must be vigilant in noticing and listening to oppressed, invisible, outsiders. Inclusionary thinking can be fostered by relationships, communication, and appreciation of diversity. Like Opotow, all the authors in this section point out that structural violence is not inevitable if we become aware of its operation, and build systematic ways to mitigate its effects. Learning about structural violence may be discouraging, overwhelming, or maddening, but these papers encourage us to step beyond guilt and anger, and begin to think about how to reduce structural violence. All the authors in this section note that the same structures (such as global communication and normal social cognition) which feed structural violence, can also be used to empower citizens to reduce it. ====The nuclearization of society enforces an epistemologically bankrupt mode of thinking in place of traditional ways of indigenous people. ==== Part 2: CriticismSubpoint A) Environmental racismEvery aspect of nuclear production overlaps and impedes upon Native AmericansMatsunaga 14 ~Kyoko Matsunaga, Associate Professor, Kobe City University of Foreign Studies, "Leslie Marmon Silko and Nuclear Dissent in the American Southwest," The Japanese Journal of American Studies, No. 25, 2014~ JW And to add insult to injury, Native Americans don't receive proper compensation for damagesKyne and Bolin 7/12 ~Dean Kyne, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Bob Bolin, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, "Emerging Environmental Justice Issues in Nuclear Power and Radioactive Contamination," International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, July 12, 2016~ JW Subpoint B) Cultural GenocideThe health and ecological effects on indigenous populations is tantamount to cultural genocideRyser et al 3/27 1 ~Rudolph C. Ryser, Chairperson of the Center for World Indigenous Studies (CWIS), a research, education and public policy institution and he is a Fulbright Research Scholar, "The Indigenous World Under a Nuclear Cloud," Truth-Out, March 27, 2016, http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35381-the-indigenous-world-under-a-nuclear-cloud~~ JW Subpoint C) Nuclear colonial discourseDiscourse about native lands as wastelands permits nuclear colonialismEndres 09 1 ~Danielle Endres, Associate Professor of communications @ University of Utah, "From wasteland to waste site: the role of discourse in nuclear power's environmental injustices," Local Environment Vol. 14, No. 10, November 2009, 917–937~ JW Wasteland discourse justifies terrible nuclear policies. It directly spills over into actual policies and harmsEndres 2 ~Danielle Endres, Associate Professor of communications @ University of Utah, "From wasteland to waste site: the role of discourse in nuclear power's environmental injustices," Local Environment Vol. 14, No. 10, November 2009, 917–937~ JW The 1AC is a direct challenge to this colonial discourse. We recognize that these lands have spiritual and cultural value to indigenous populations. Our affirmation of the resolution is our method to rectify this historic abuse and challenge traditional discourse that justifies cultural destruction.Plan text: Native American tribal governments in conjunction with the USFG will ban the production of nuclear power near Native American lands.Part 3: Solvency1. Conjunction with the federal government is key. There are nuclear activities near indigenous lands that negatively affect tribes but fall outside their jurisdictionTsosie 15 1 ~Rebecca Tsosie, Regent's Professor of Law, Arizona State University, "Indigenous Peoples and the Ethics of Remediation: Redressing the Legacy of Radioactive Contamination for Native Peoples and Native Lands," Santa Clara Journal of International Law Vol 13 Issue 1, April 2, 2015~ JW 2. Any amount of radiation is dangerous. Means a ban of all nuclear power is the only way to solve.Ryser et al 2 ~Rudolph C. Ryser, Chairperson of the Center for World Indigenous Studies (CWIS), a research, education and public policy institution and he is a Fulbright Research Scholar, "The Indigenous World Under a Nuclear Cloud," Truth-Out, March 27, 2016, http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35381-the-indigenous-world-under-a-nuclear-cloud~~ JW 3. Exercising Native American sovereign power is uniquely key to addressing the historical legacy of nuclear colonialismTsosie 2~Rebecca Tsosie, Regent's Professor of Law, Arizona State University, "Indigenous Peoples and the Ethics of Remediation: Redressing the Legacy of Radioactive Contamination for Native Peoples and Native Lands," Santa Clara Journal of International Law Vol 13 Issue 1, April 2, 2015~ JW 4. The aff is part of a larger resistance to nuclear colonialism.Endres 3 ~Danielle Endres, Associate Professor of communications @ University of Utah, "The Rhetoric of Nuclear Colonialism: Rhetorical Exclusion of American Indian Arguments in the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Siting Decision," Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies,6:1,39 — 60, 2009~ Part 4: Underview1. Aff gets RVI's on theorya) It's key to reciprocity since neg will kick theory if I answer it 2. If they win offense under a T interp, you should re-evaluate the 1AC as a whole res aff:a) allows us to return to substance and prevents the round from devolving to theory 3. Reject low probability impacts. Existential risk calculus based on a series of unlikely events fails.Kessler and Daase 08 ~Oliver Kessler and Christopher Daase, Faculty of Sociology, University of Bielefeld, Department of Political Science, University of Munich, "From Insecurity to Uncertainty: Risk and the Paradox of Security Politics," Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, Vol. 33, No. 2, The Social Construction and Control of Danger in Counterterrorism (Apr.-June 2008), pp. 211-232~ 4. Abstract critique is useless unless it offers a concrete policy alternative that can solve for the harmsBryant 12 bracketed for grammar | 9/10/16 |
SEPTOCT - Loyola R5 ACTournament: Loyola | Round: 5 | Opponent: Marlborough GK | Judge: Tim McHugh 1AC – SVAll brackets for offensive language Part 1: FrameworkThe Role of the Judge is to be a critical educator focusing on the liberation of the oppressedGiroux 06 ~Henry Giroux, American scholar and cultural critic, "America on the Edge: Henry Giro ux on Politics, Culture, and Education," Springer, March 31, 2006~ JW The Role of the Ballot is to endorse the best methodology to liberate oppressed groupsDebate should deal with questions of real-world consequences—ideal theories ignore the concrete nature of the world and legitimize oppression
Structural violence outweighs. We must listen to the voices of the oppressed.Winter and Leighton 99 (Deborah DuNann Winter and Dana C. Leighton. Winter: Psychologist that specializes in Social Psych, Counseling Psych, Historical and Contemporary Issues, Peace Psychology. Leighton: PhD graduate student in the Psychology Department at the University of Arkansas. Knowledgable in the fields of social psychology, peace psychology, and ustice and intergroup responses to transgressions of justice) (Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology in the 21st century. Pg 4-5, 1999) Finally, to recognize the operation of structural violence forces us to ask questions about how and why we tolerate it, questions which often have painful answers for the privileged elite who unconsciously support it. A final question of this section is how and why we allow ourselves to be so oblivious to structural violence. Susan Opotow offers an intriguing set of answers, in her article Social Injustice. She argues that our normal perceptual/cognitive processes divide people into in-groups and out-groups. Those outside our group lie outside our scope of justice. Injustice that would be instantaneously confronted if it occurred to someone we love or know is barely noticed if it occurs to strangers or those who are invisible or irrelevant. We do not seem to be able to open our minds and our hearts to everyone, so we draw conceptual lines between those who are in and out of our moral circle. Those who fall outside are morally excluded, and become either invisible, or demeaned in some way so that we do not have to acknowledge the injustice they suffer. Moral exclusion is a human failing, but Opotow argues convincingly that it is an outcome of everyday social cognition. To reduce its nefarious effects, we must be vigilant in noticing and listening to oppressed, invisible, outsiders. Inclusionary thinking can be fostered by relationships, communication, and appreciation of diversity. Like Opotow, all the authors in this section point out that structural violence is not inevitable if we become aware of its operation, and build systematic ways to mitigate its effects. Learning about structural violence may be discouraging, overwhelming, or maddening, but these papers encourage us to step beyond guilt and anger, and begin to think about how to reduce structural violence. All the authors in this section note that the same structures (such as global communication and normal social cognition) which feed structural violence, can also be used to empower citizens to reduce it. ====The nuclearization of society enforces an epistemologically bankrupt mode of thinking in place of traditional ways of indigenous people. ==== Part 2: CriticismSubpoint A) Environmental racismEvery aspect of nuclear production overlaps and impedes upon Native AmericansMatsunaga 14 ~Kyoko Matsunaga, Associate Professor, Kobe City University of Foreign Studies, "Leslie Marmon Silko and Nuclear Dissent in the American Southwest," The Japanese Journal of American Studies, No. 25, 2014~ JW And to add insult to injury, Native Americans don't receive proper compensation for damagesKyne and Bolin 7/12 ~Dean Kyne, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Bob Bolin, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, "Emerging Environmental Justice Issues in Nuclear Power and Radioactive Contamination," International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, July 12, 2016~ JW Subpoint B) Cultural GenocideThe health and ecological effects on indigenous populations is tantamount to cultural genocideRyser et al 3/27 1 ~Rudolph C. Ryser, Chairperson of the Center for World Indigenous Studies (CWIS), a research, education and public policy institution and he is a Fulbright Research Scholar, "The Indigenous World Under a Nuclear Cloud," Truth-Out, March 27, 2016, http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35381-the-indigenous-world-under-a-nuclear-cloud~~ JW Subpoint C) Nuclear colonial discourseDiscourse about native lands as wastelands permits nuclear colonialismEndres 09 1 ~Danielle Endres, Associate Professor of communications @ University of Utah, "From wasteland to waste site: the role of discourse in nuclear power's environmental injustices," Local Environment Vol. 14, No. 10, November 2009, 917–937~ JW Wasteland discourse justifies terrible nuclear policies. It directly spills over into actual policies and harmsEndres 2 ~Danielle Endres, Associate Professor of communications @ University of Utah, "From wasteland to waste site: the role of discourse in nuclear power's environmental injustices," Local Environment Vol. 14, No. 10, November 2009, 917–937~ JW The 1AC is a direct challenge to this colonial discourse. We recognize that these lands have spiritual and cultural value to indigenous populations. Our affirmation of the resolution is our method to rectify this historic abuse and challenge traditional discourse that justifies cultural destruction.Plan text: Native American tribal governments in conjunction with the USFG will ban the production of nuclear power near Native American lands.Part 3: Solvency1. Conjunction with the federal government is key. There are nuclear activities near indigenous lands that negatively affect tribes but fall outside their jurisdictionTsosie 15 2 ~Rebecca Tsosie, Regent's Professor of Law, Arizona State University, "Indigenous Peoples and the Ethics of Remediation: Redressing the Legacy of Radioactive Contamination for Native Peoples and Native Lands," Santa Clara Journal of International Law Vol 13 Issue 1, April 2, 2015~ JW 2. Any amount of radiation is dangerous. Means a ban of all nuclear power is the only way to solve.Ryser et al 2 ~Rudolph C. Ryser, Chairperson of the Center for World Indigenous Studies (CWIS), a research, education and public policy institution and he is a Fulbright Research Scholar, "The Indigenous World Under a Nuclear Cloud," Truth-Out, March 27, 2016, http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35381-the-indigenous-world-under-a-nuclear-cloud~~ JW 3. Exercising Native American sovereign power is uniquely key to addressing the historical legacy of nuclear colonialismTsosie 3 ~Rebecca Tsosie, Regent's Professor of Law, Arizona State University, "Indigenous Peoples and the Ethics of Remediation: Redressing the Legacy of Radioactive Contamination for Native Peoples and Native Lands," Santa Clara Journal of International Law Vol 13 Issue 1, April 2, 2015~ JW 4. The aff is part of a larger resistance to nuclear colonialism.Endres 3 ~Danielle Endres, Associate Professor of communications @ University of Utah, "The Rhetoric of Nuclear Colonialism: Rhetorical Exclusion of American Indian Arguments in the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Siting Decision," Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies,6:1,39 — 60, 2009~ Part 4: Underview1. Aff gets RVI's on theorya) It's key to reciprocity since neg will kick theory if I answer it 2. If they win offense under a T interp, you should re-evaluate the 1AC as a whole res aff:a) allows us to return to substance and prevents the round from devolving to theory 3. Reject low probability impacts.Kessler and Daase 08 ~Oliver Kessler and Christopher Daase, Faculty of Sociology, University of Bielefeld, Department of Political Science, University of Munich, "From Insecurity to Uncertainty: Risk and the Paradox of Security Politics," Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, Vol. 33, No. 2, The Social Construction and Control of Danger in Counterterrorism (Apr.-June 2008), pp. 211-232~ 4. Abstract critique is useless unless it offers a concrete policy alternative that can solve for the harmsBryant 12 bracketed for grammar | 9/11/16 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
9/10/16 | jonghakwon@gmailcom |
| |
9/10/16 | jonghakwon@gmailcom |
|